DSLR sales are in decline. The P&S market has been destroyed by cell phones. What should Canon do as an alternative to watching one of its core markets slowly(?) become extinct? Here's one idea: fight cell phones that are cameras with cameras that are cell phones. Embed a cellular connectivity and a browser into DSLRs and P&Ss, combined with touch screen and basic photo editing capability in-camera (cropping, contrast, etc.). Allow people to easily post photos to Facebook, etc, directly from their DSLRs, the way cell phones do. Sure, consumers would need to pay for a cell data plan, but I think plenty of consumers who fork out $700-$2500 for DSLRs and double that or more for lenses, would be willing to pay a little extra every month to be able to share their pictures instantly. Am I missing something? Why wouldn't Canon or some other camera maker try this rather than passively observe their market's long-term decline?

The smartphone market is incredibly competitive - none of the current camera makers would stand a chance. An easier solution would be a better camera Wifi implementation and Wifi-to-Cell gateway software implementation in existing smartphones.

1 Series DSLR but with a slightly smaller body. In between say the current 1Dx and the 5D3. At least 36 MP with 14 stop DR. 1.3x and 1.6x crop modes with high speed capability (say 10-12fps) with superb AF. All priced at $4800.

In addition to that. A ILMC (Mirrorless) camera with similar sensor but at a lower price, again great AF is a must. ($2800)

tshore wrote:
Here's one idea: fight cell phones that are cameras with cameras that are cell phones. Embed a cellular connectivity and a browser into DSLRs and P&Ss, combined with touch screen and basic photo editing capability in-camera (cropping, contrast, etc.). Allow people to easily post photos to Facebook, etc, directly from their DSLRs, the way cell phones do.

Why is this better than a current cell phone?
Why would anyone need this product?

Although I agree that better connectivity is a necessary upgrade to current camera offerings.

I believe Canon will not change anything - they mainly target the market for videographers, wedding/event/sports shooters. It is a profitable market - for now. Other companies move in a different direction now or diversify - as seen now with Sony by releasing similar mirrorless FF camera models for different group of users which I find a very smart idea. Canon behaves like a dinosaur - even more than Nikon which at least tried to do something different with the D800E and the retro DSLR camera. Because of the large group of photographers in this commercial target market of Canon, the management there likely has no intention to innovate a lot or to make changes. This will work out in the short term, but can be very bad in the long run for Canon when others prove to be very successful in new markets which Canon does not include now and in the near future.

retrofocus wrote:
I believe Canon will not change anything - they mainly target the market for videographers, wedding/event/sports shooters. It is a profitable market - for now. Other companies move in a different direction now or diversify - as seen now with Sony by releasing similar mirrorless FF camera models for different group of users which I find a very smart idea. Canon behaves like a dinosaur - even more than Nikon which at least tried to do something different with the D800E and the retro DSLR camera. Because of the large group of photographers in this commercial target market of Canon, the management there likely has no intention to innovate a lot or to make changes. This will work out in the short term, but can be very bad in the long run for Canon when others prove to be very successful in new markets which Canon does not include now and in the near future. ...Show more →

The Sony imaging division is down from 18 billion to 1 billion (yen) profit. Nikon has missed their targets and profits are falling and have announced a restructuring.

Sounds like all the camera makers are a similar position right now.

Often, the company that forges a steady path comes out ahead. Some of the companies are trying to fire out a dozen different products and never really see things through to the end. Sony has released so many 'innovative' ideas over the years, none of which are still around in any variation.

And don't forget that the largest group of photographers don't fit into a category, they are just people who use a camera for anything and everything that comes up. Not everyone fits into your categories of wedding/events/sports or video

Sneakyracer wrote:
1 Series DSLR but with a slightly smaller body. In between say the current 1Dx and the 5D3. At least 36 MP with 14 stop DR. 1.3x and 1.6x crop modes with high speed capability (say 10-12fps) with superb AF. All priced at $4800.

In addition to that. A ILMC (Mirrorless) camera with similar sensor but at a lower price, again great AF is a must. ($2800)

That should do it for a long time. It's not that complicated.
The new Sony A7s already has 15.3 DR.

Trying to turn a camera into a phone is not a winning idea: The primary purpose of a phone is to be a portable device that makes calls, sends messages etc. Almost everyone has one, and to be competitive a phone needs to perform it's core function well. Adding an adequate camera adds value to this, as it allows owners to reduce the number of devices they carry around without too many compromises in terms of capability.

The primary purpose of a camera is to take pictures, preferably of high quality. They tend to be more bulky than phones and nowhere near as many people have them as have smartphones. Adding phone capability to the camera does not reduce the number of devices the owner carries, because the camera is too bulky to act as a genuine phone replacement. The owner will carry the phone anyway. Additionally, the owner needs to pay for an additional SIM card for the camera. It is hard to see why people would flock to buy a camera with phone functionality.

I think in reality Canon and Nikon simply have to accept that the camera business is in decline and there is nothing they can do about it. They will have to give up the low end P&S market entirely, focus on higher value products and re-adjust to the reality that the world has moved on and their market is much smaller. And they need to keep their eyes open for the next disruptive technology so as not to follow Kodak into the history books. Something like Light Field imaging in a smartphone would do the trick i think.

tshore wrote:
DSLR sales are in decline. The P&S market has been destroyed by cell phones. What should Canon do as an alternative to watching one of its core markets slowly(?) become extinct? Here's one idea: fight cell phones that are cameras with cameras that are cell phones. Embed a cellular connectivity and a browser into DSLRs and P&Ss, combined with touch screen and basic photo editing capability in-camera (cropping, contrast, etc.). Allow people to easily post photos to Facebook, etc, directly from their DSLRs, the way cell phones do. Sure, consumers would need to pay for a cell data plan, but I think plenty of consumers who fork out $700-$2500 for DSLRs and double that or more for lenses, would be willing to pay a little extra every month to be able to share their pictures instantly. Am I missing something? Why wouldn't Canon or some other camera maker try this rather than passively observe their market's long-term decline?...Show more →

They already have wifi in most/many new DSLR cameras. I can't really see the point of being able to post images to FB in areas that don't have wifi. And, with wifi, you can use your current smartphone as a hotspot, no need to have cell plans in both devices.

What is more likely is a shift away from 'full-frame' cameras for the masses (high end users will still stay with FF or MF). We will quickly get to a point with IQ that there is nothing inherently better about a 35mm sensor size, except tradition and a stock of lenses designed for that format. If people truly embrace the small camera design, they will move more to smaller sensors and the associated smaller lenses and bodies. With the advance of technology, the image quality of smaller sensors will get to such a high level that the differences will be marginal compared to FF.

If I were Canon, I would look more closely at APS-c and the smaller 1inch sensors like the RX100 design. The camera makers can still compete with smartphones in the P&S market if they have very high quality in pocketable sizes (truly pocketable like the original RX100).